I agree, the C's should trade Rondo. I was justing thinking about how they can get much worse for next season, this is the answer! Lets trade Pierce too, he is too good, lets say P Double for Maggette? That could work if you want the C's to stink next year.

The C's aren't going to be a contender next year regardless unless they can land someone using cap space in a trade (which means KG, Allen, and Green aren't back unless they sign for very low dollars). Thus, I am all for starting the rebuilding process earlier and looking to go after multiple top tier free agents in 2013 or beyond (like Dwight).

People have been saying the Celts won't be contenders next year for the last 3-4 years. Take the current team with a healthy PP and Bradley, add Jeff Green, possibly Wilcox and a pick or two, that's a contender.

No they haven't, just last year and this year, and last year the team lost in the second round and won 1 game (thus not a contender). This year injuries to other teams has certainly opened the door, but I'd still be surprised if Boston gets by Miami (even without Bosh). I hope it happens, but it would still surprise me.

Boston is not going to be a contender next year without major roster moves. The team is getting older and more injured every day and that isn't going to radically improve next year without an influx of good younger talent. It certainly could happen with some savvy trades by Ainge, but I'm not holding out hope that it will.

If they bring back the band (even minus Ray) next season plus a healthy Jeff Green (and given a rehabilitated Bradley) plus the first rounders, who in the East besides Miami could be considered better than the Celtics?

Chicago has a big question mark with Rose. Indiana? Atlanta with a healthy squad? New York?

All big question marks. Miami would be the only team I'd consider to be better on paper.

If you're playing in the conference finals with a trip to the NBA Finals on the line, you're a contender in my book. And they could still potentially have roster flexibility for summer of 2013. It would just be a matter of reloading the right way and getting some of these rookies to pan out.

Obviously it depends on what happens, but I would put Indiana, Chicago, and Atlanta ahead of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Orlando (if they keep Dwight) all could be as well. That doesn't say contender to me, especially given Pierce and KG are old and injured a lot.

You're putting a top team who's star player just had a serious knee injury above the Celts, along with a group of teams who, at full strength, are no better than a severely depleted Celtics team. Our window isn't closed any more, or even as much, as the Spurs window was after they were dispatched in the first round last year.

Why would we willing become a bad team just so we can gamble on the hopes that down the line we can build a contender through the lottery? That process takes times and hardly ever works.

You have to think the pick will be a superstar level player, a higher level player than Rondo.

The example of this sort of move is the long reported on Pierce for Van Excel and a pick that would have been CP3 if Danny had made it.

I know that. That's my point. We do not have that option so there's no reason to gamble on the lottery just yet. Right now we don't know what pick we'll get and who'll be available where next year. Even if we did I'd still be hesitant to start from scratch this summer. Drafting one superstar isn't enough to build a contender if you don't have pieces in place already or get some other great picks in the draft.

I'd rather be really bad for a season or two and collect high quality assets then barely make the playoffs and lose in the first or second round, which is what I believe this team is headed towards without making significant moves.

And what makes you so sure after a season or two we will suddenly become good? Even if we dramatically improve I find it hard to imagine we will be better than a fringe/early exit playoff team which is exactly where you project us to be now. So we're bad for a bit and and right back to where we started. It's one thing for the team to slip in mediocrity. It's another to deliberately choose that path. Look at teams like the Bobcats, Raptors, Kings etc. Often the payoff from being in the lottery is not as close as a couple of seasons. I see us having a better chance of becoming contenders through trades and free agency than through the draft.

Logged

Tommy: He's got a line about me. Tell him the line.

Mike: Everybody 60 or over knows Tommy as a player. Everybody 40 or over knows Tommy as a coach. Everybody 20 or over knows Tommy as a broadcaster. And everybody 10 or under thinks he's Shrek.

I just dont' see the point of getting rid of a 25 year old all-star when you're trying to rebuild.

You want to have 25 year old all-stars on your team when you're assembling a new core to your team. Getting rid of him for the sake of draft position is just hitting the reset button because you lack the vision to try something else.

One 25 year old all star (who isn't a top five player in the game) is going to make your team good enough to just make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs. That isn't a good place to be when you are trying to rebuild. You won't be bad enough to get the truly elite draft assets and likewise won't be good enough to draw elite level players to your team. You end up with overpriced role players in free agency.

Sadly I called that. Still can't believe this off season went as poorly as it did.

I just dont' see the point of getting rid of a 25 year old all-star when you're trying to rebuild.

You want to have 25 year old all-stars on your team when you're assembling a new core to your team. Getting rid of him for the sake of draft position is just hitting the reset button because you lack the vision to try something else.

One 25 year old all star (who isn't a top five player in the game) is going to make your team good enough to just make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs. That isn't a good place to be when you are trying to rebuild. You won't be bad enough to get the truly elite draft assets and likewise won't be good enough to draw elite level players to your team. You end up with overpriced role players in free agency.

Sadly I called that. Still can't believe this off season went as poorly as it did.

Edited. We've just started seeing our team finally start to fi into their roles. Can't judge that fully yet. I still think we made out like bandits in a pretty weak FA class. Had the Darko thing worked out, we'd have filled pretty much every hole left open. And remember, we had what, 3 people under the books come the offseason?

It's yet to fully be seen, but i think we made out great this offseason, resigning KG as our best move.

« Last Edit: January 08, 2013, 10:47:31 AM by Edgar »

Logged

My pic is now, and will be Fab Melo until he posts his first official NBA dbl-dbl. This may be permanent.

I just dont' see the point of getting rid of a 25 year old all-star when you're trying to rebuild.

You want to have 25 year old all-stars on your team when you're assembling a new core to your team. Getting rid of him for the sake of draft position is just hitting the reset button because you lack the vision to try something else.

One 25 year old all star (who isn't a top five player in the game) is going to make your team good enough to just make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs. That isn't a good place to be when you are trying to rebuild. You won't be bad enough to get the truly elite draft assets and likewise won't be good enough to draw elite level players to your team. You end up with overpriced role players in free agency.

Sadly I called that. Still can't believe this off season went as poorly as it did.

Overpriced role players during a time when you wouldn't have cap space anyways, most of whom will be off the books once we can actually have cap space, the rest will be left on 1 year deals... so, I find your analysis lacking.

Danny did great during the off-season, there's really no ifs or buts about it. Case closed, not up to discussion

I just dont' see the point of getting rid of a 25 year old all-star when you're trying to rebuild.

You want to have 25 year old all-stars on your team when you're assembling a new core to your team. Getting rid of him for the sake of draft position is just hitting the reset button because you lack the vision to try something else.

One 25 year old all star (who isn't a top five player in the game) is going to make your team good enough to just make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs. That isn't a good place to be when you are trying to rebuild. You won't be bad enough to get the truly elite draft assets and likewise won't be good enough to draw elite level players to your team. You end up with overpriced role players in free agency.

Sadly I called that. Still can't believe this off season went as poorly as it did.

Overpriced role players during a time when you wouldn't have cap space anyways, most of whom will be off the books once we can actually have cap space, the rest will be left on 1 year deals... so, I find your analysis lacking.

Danny did great during the off-season, there's really no ifs or buts about it. Case closed, not up to discussion

um, entering last summer, Boston had only Rondo and Pierce signed past the year except for the rookie contract players (which aren't much more than the cap hold for the roster spot anyway). Boston signed KG to more years than I would have given his age, but he was at least an understandable signing. Signing Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee for 26 million a year (or so) for the next 3 years (plus a couple guys with that extra year), was totally and utterly ridiculous. Mediocre role players signed in free agency. Just as I was afraid would happen.

Oh and BTW if the Celtics had not signed anyone past this year except KG and the rookies and assuming Pierce actually exercised his 1 yr option, Boston would have been at about 47 million next summer (with cap holds and what not), which is enough to at least get a solid mid-tier player and also would have allowed Boston to be able to sign and trade for other players. Now lets say Pierce decides to retire and opts out, Boston would have been players for max level players next summer, but now can't be because of the 26 million in flotsam that is Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. Heck even if KG and Pierce both retire this summer, Boston still can't sign more than a mid-tier free agent this summer because of the crap signed last year.

Ainge destroyed all long term flexibility by giving awful contracts to mediocre players last summer. The only chance Boston has to get it back is to give up real value (like Bradley, Sully, and picks) to unload the awful contracts on some other team i.e Boston has to pay someone else to take on the flotsam.

"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped." Mark Jackson

If you're resigning KG then you're playing to win now. If you just get KG/Pierce/Rondo/Rooks/+vet min guys then why did you bother to sign KG? Once we signed KG the cap room we had in 3 guys (Rondo/Pierce/KG) meant that to field a contending team around them = no cap space.

You wanted to blow it up, trade Rondo/Pierce, and let KG walk we get it.

If you're resigning KG then you're playing to win now. If you just get KG/Pierce/Rondo/Rooks/+vet min guys then why did you bother to sign KG? Once we signed KG the cap room we had in 3 guys (Rondo/Pierce/KG) meant that to field a contending team around them = no cap space.

You wanted to blow it up, trade Rondo/Pierce, and let KG walk we get it.

Exactly. KG was the key this summer. And the way the market was playing out, the C's basically had 2 choices. Bring back KG, and then fill in the roster as well as you can to try to keep winning, or blow it up and play the lottery game.

I am glad they are not playing the lottery game. That has way too many losers.

If you're resigning KG then you're playing to win now. If you just get KG/Pierce/Rondo/Rooks/+vet min guys then why did you bother to sign KG? Once we signed KG the cap room we had in 3 guys (Rondo/Pierce/KG) meant that to field a contending team around them = no cap space.

You wanted to blow it up, trade Rondo/Pierce, and let KG walk we get it.

Exactly. KG was the key this summer. And the way the market was playing out, the C's basically had 2 choices. Bring back KG, and then fill in the roster as well as you can to try to keep winning, or blow it up and play the lottery game.

I am glad they are not playing the lottery game. That has way too many losers.

I just dont' see the point of getting rid of a 25 year old all-star when you're trying to rebuild.

You want to have 25 year old all-stars on your team when you're assembling a new core to your team. Getting rid of him for the sake of draft position is just hitting the reset button because you lack the vision to try something else.

One 25 year old all star (who isn't a top five player in the game) is going to make your team good enough to just make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs. That isn't a good place to be when you are trying to rebuild. You won't be bad enough to get the truly elite draft assets and likewise won't be good enough to draw elite level players to your team. You end up with overpriced role players in free agency.

Sadly I called that. Still can't believe this off season went as poorly as it did.

Overpriced role players during a time when you wouldn't have cap space anyways, most of whom will be off the books once we can actually have cap space, the rest will be left on 1 year deals... so, I find your analysis lacking.

Danny did great during the off-season, there's really no ifs or buts about it. Case closed, not up to discussion

um, entering last summer, Boston had only Rondo and Pierce signed past the year except for the rookie contract players (which aren't much more than the cap hold for the roster spot anyway). Boston signed KG to more years than I would have given his age, but he was at least an understandable signing. Signing Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee for 26 million a year (or so) for the next 3 years (plus a couple guys with that extra year), was totally and utterly ridiculous. Mediocre role players signed in free agency. Just as I was afraid would happen.

Oh and BTW if the Celtics had not signed anyone past this year except KG and the rookies and assuming Pierce actually exercised his 1 yr option, Boston would have been at about 47 million next summer (with cap holds and what not), which is enough to at least get a solid mid-tier player and also would have allowed Boston to be able to sign and trade for other players. Now lets say Pierce decides to retire and opts out, Boston would have been players for max level players next summer, but now can't be because of the 26 million in flotsam that is Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. Heck even if KG and Pierce both retire this summer, Boston still can't sign more than a mid-tier free agent this summer because of the crap signed last year.

Ainge destroyed all long term flexibility by giving awful contracts to mediocre players last summer. The only chance Boston has to get it back is to give up real value (like Bradley, Sully, and picks) to unload the awful contracts on some other team i.e Boston has to pay someone else to take on the flotsam.

So you wanted to go into this season with KG, Pierce, Rondo, the rookies, and the rest of the roster made up of vet. minimum guys on one year contracts?

I think that would have been both a terrible and unrealistic scenario.

For one thing, I'm sure that Danny assured KG that we would do what it took to put enough talent around the team to keep them in contention when he was convincing him to re-sign.

"Thanks for staying, KG. Oh, by the way, I lied. I'm really just trying to clear contracts and get this team to the lottery as fast as possible." I don't think that would have gone over too well.

I just dont' see the point of getting rid of a 25 year old all-star when you're trying to rebuild.

You want to have 25 year old all-stars on your team when you're assembling a new core to your team. Getting rid of him for the sake of draft position is just hitting the reset button because you lack the vision to try something else.

One 25 year old all star (who isn't a top five player in the game) is going to make your team good enough to just make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs. That isn't a good place to be when you are trying to rebuild. You won't be bad enough to get the truly elite draft assets and likewise won't be good enough to draw elite level players to your team. You end up with overpriced role players in free agency.

Sadly I called that. Still can't believe this off season went as poorly as it did.

Overpriced role players during a time when you wouldn't have cap space anyways, most of whom will be off the books once we can actually have cap space, the rest will be left on 1 year deals... so, I find your analysis lacking.

Danny did great during the off-season, there's really no ifs or buts about it. Case closed, not up to discussion

um, entering last summer, Boston had only Rondo and Pierce signed past the year except for the rookie contract players (which aren't much more than the cap hold for the roster spot anyway). Boston signed KG to more years than I would have given his age, but he was at least an understandable signing. Signing Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee for 26 million a year (or so) for the next 3 years (plus a couple guys with that extra year), was totally and utterly ridiculous. Mediocre role players signed in free agency. Just as I was afraid would happen.

Oh and BTW if the Celtics had not signed anyone past this year except KG and the rookies and assuming Pierce actually exercised his 1 yr option, Boston would have been at about 47 million next summer (with cap holds and what not), which is enough to at least get a solid mid-tier player and also would have allowed Boston to be able to sign and trade for other players. Now lets say Pierce decides to retire and opts out, Boston would have been players for max level players next summer, but now can't be because of the 26 million in flotsam that is Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. Heck even if KG and Pierce both retire this summer, Boston still can't sign more than a mid-tier free agent this summer because of the crap signed last year.

Ainge destroyed all long term flexibility by giving awful contracts to mediocre players last summer. The only chance Boston has to get it back is to give up real value (like Bradley, Sully, and picks) to unload the awful contracts on some other team i.e Boston has to pay someone else to take on the flotsam.

This reationale is just headscratching at best.

Signing KG mean you're all in for the life of that contract as someone else mentioned above. Danny signed players that were solid role players to support KG/PP/Rondo. No argument with who he chose -- all looked like good pickups. I can see an issue with some of the amounts and years but basically everyone's deal rolls off with KG. Any dreams of being a buyer in free agency is proven to be crap. look at all the teams that unloaded contracts in the hopes of landing the big FA's a couple of years ago. How'd that work out for them when Bron and Bosh colluded to go to Miami. Nets got nothing. NY settled for Amare. Chicago settled for Boozer. Only Miami came out of that offseason happy. Thinking that there's just a huge wave of great talent hitting free agency in the near future, that they are max-contract quality players AND that the C's are a desired destination is just wholly unrealistic.